While the Conference we attended is entitled“Changing Families in a ChangingWorld,”

and we listened to many presentationsthat there are

many new practices offamily, many localpractitioners, who attendedour seminarafter the conference andstudy visit,did not think that those practices are new.Many of the so-called oldforms of families areperhaps

not old. Many of the new practices may howeverhave existed for very long time already. Old or new, they perhaps just havedifferent very manifestations in the new social and cultural contexts. Itreallydoesn’t matter whether those practices are new or not. What matters is how weunderstand this variety of family forms and practices in these contexts and deliberatemore policy and practice measure to support these changing family forms andpractices.

In this report, we will first map out the different forms and practices of families andidentify some of the emerging issues facing families in different parts of the world.We will then identify a number of major issues that deserve more discussion andexploration in the context of Hong Kong. They are namely diversity of family forms,transnational

families and practices, and parenting. Asthere are diverse forms andpractices of families, no simple wisdom or paradigm is adequate in understandingthe familiesof

our time.More conceptualdeliberation

andempirical

research areneeded. In this report, we shall also be highlighting a action research projectconducted in Scotland and illustrate how evidence-based practice can supportdiverse forms of families in the globalized world.

2

II.

Mapping the Family Issues in the Globalized World

Roughly categorized, the variety of family practices heard of during the conferencecould be summarized in the table below:

Marriage &Partnership

Parenting

Child care/elder care

Parenthood:Fatherhood/Motherhood

Reproduction

Inter-ethnicmarriage

Mixed children

Left behindchildren

Delayed parenthood

Late fertility and infertility

Forcedmarriage in theWest

International adoption

Work-lifebalance

Singlehood

Grandparent’s parenting andc慲e

C潮晬楣o anT癩潬vnce

䝡礯䱥獢楡ir敬eWi潮獨ip ☠f慭楬礠T敳楧es

䥃T㨠䱩癩L朠慰慲a W潧eWh敲

Nc潬o杹

N敷⁐潬og慭y

䕸Nra-f慭楬楡氠c慲e

愮

Marriage and Partnership

In our time, whether marriage is getting less attractiveor not remains a matter ofdebate.What is more clear is thatdivorce is gettingprevalent.

In a time whenthe society has a mixture of diverse attitudes towards marriage and partnership,one could expect that there would be diverse forms of partnerships/relationships.Also,mixture

of old and new forms of relationship practices could also be seen.For example, a

transparency of misbehaviors inrelationships/partnerships resulted from the societal pressure

that pushes peopleto get married with someone.

Likewise, we heard ofretraditionalization offamily life (JuliaCarter,University of York,UK),

but at the same time this ispracticed

with much precedent relationship experiments of people who see3

other fleeting sexual relationships as “necessary distractions” on the path

tocommitment and marriage.For them, family as “a sort of refuge in the

chillyenvironment of our affluent, impersonal, uncertain society”

is still very muchtreasured.

In a society full of uncertainties, choices of forms of relationshipsavailable to some people may in some sense be the same set, but the trajectoryof their

relationship choosing is no longer stable. Increased level oftransparency ofarelationshipdoes not secure the relationship more. Rather, itraises the question of trust more sharply.

For other people, new forms of marriage and partnerships emerge

out

of acontext of highly connected transnational environment of the world. Some arechosen

and some not.



Inter-ethnic Marriage



NewForced Marriage



New Polygamy



Singlehood



Gay and LesbianMarriage/Relationships

These forms of relationships, again, may not be new, but in terms of themagnitude and the ways these relationships are played out in the new globalizedcontexts, new relationship phenomena certainly deserve close attention. Forexample, inter-ethnic marriage has emerged for many years, but it’s much moreprevalent now. Increased level of connectedness of different ethnicitiesproduce more such relationships in quantity but at the same time produce moreinter-ethnic conflicts at the background of these

relationships,giving theseindividually chosen relationships a new set of social and cultural dynamics toconsider. Likewise, polygamy now acquires a new form of legitimacy, one thatdoes not require any legitimacy. A transnational subject finds no material aswell as moral burden to sustain relationships in different parts of the world.

Allin all, there is not just a variety of pre-determined forms of partnership orrelationship that one can choose from. Like engineering, people can choosedifferent

parts of human relationships, and re-combine it into something new.People are free to choose and to re-combine. Yet, out of a certain life situationor conditions, they are also being shaped and re-combined.

The concept of“newfamily

design”

is relevant here. People designtheir relationship so as toprovide solutions to their current constraints in their everyday life. In otherwords, they design to fit a certain larger societal design.

4

b.

Parenting and Family Care (Child Care, Elder Care)

In our time, parenting and family care giving are increasingly not just a householdmatter. As there is a massive scale of flow of parents (as well as children) due toemployment (as well as study), the parenting and caring situation of the familyhas experienced a

profound change. In some migrant villages in the South EastAsia, for example, almost all active members of the families are aboard. Onlycare givers, children, old people and the sick stay at home. The active membershowever usually are the most important parenting and care taking players for thechildren and the old, but they are most distant from the household. The

resultof thetug-of-war between the workplace (labour market) and the householdisclear. Care is therefore rendered by someone employed than the familymembers (usually, others’

mothers). An economically mobile parent at theNorth hires someone from the South to take care of his family

members who areradically stuck in the household. The latter then is radically stuck in the fomer’slocal household. Although she is relatively mobile in her own family in theSouth, her mobility is captured by heremployer. Care giving is rendered in thishierarchy of“mobility”. Apparently, those who really can’t move will findthemselves not beingtaken care of but by themselves.Intersecting with thishierarchy of mobility are alsogender, race andethnicity.

Yet, even for thosewhose families are taken care of, they will find themselves restless in looking forcompensation strategies to maintain

their family relationships. A whole new setof transnational strategies and measures are produced to meet this massive needof compensation such as ICT products and services to maintain communication,cash remittances and consumers goods to serve as material compensation.

More and more people turn to their old generation for help in child care.Grand-parenting is generally revived, but again it reproduces a whole new set ofdynamics in the family. In the old days, grand-parents were usually theauthority figures. They were the sources of wisdom in child care. As familycare is outsourced, available in the market in various forms, while the parents areexposed to enormous amount of child care information, a new set ofexpectations are produced on how

children are to be cared. The quality ofgrand-parenting is of course an issue. Accountability also emerges as an issue inthe family. It may originate fromthe

parents, but more so from thegrandparents themselves.The intergenerational relationshipis thereforere-configured by newpractices

of parenting and grandparenting.

c.

Parenthood (Fatherhood, Motherhood, and Reproduction)

5

Whether and how to be a father/mother in the current context of globaleconomic competition and crisis is a central question

for people of our time.However, the parameters being taken into account in making these choices arenot just familial but social and economical.The interaction among theseparameters put parents in an endless process of anxiety. Employmentinsecurity

delays parenthood, and delayed parenthood reminds parents ofeconomic insecurity when they get old.In spite of this anxiety, delayedparenthood has a social connotation of beingprivileged, as they havejobs

thatthey need to retain. They are thereforeperceived

by the larger society not asdisadvantaged but as privileged. So, whether one wants to be a father or amother is more and more a calculated social and economic choice.

For those who choose to be

parents,issueslike family-work life balance,parenting, conflict, domestic violence all have long-term social and economicimplications to parenthood. They are all sources of anxiety for parents.

Naturally, some could not have this choice, even if this generates endless anxiety,because biologically they have problems of reproduction. But as infertility getsmore prevalent, more and more strategies and technologies are available forparents to choose from.

Adoption is one such strategy. But adoption is nolonger like before. Improved communication technology, transportation, andinformation access etc have enabled not only transnational adoption, but alsoactivities concerning the making of identity of the adopted children and theadopting parents’

identification with the children. Parents can now go back tothe country of origin of the children, understand their social and culturalcharacteristics of the original place of birth of their children, hoping tore-construct their relationship withtheir

children. Donor insemination,commercial surrogacy, and other technologies or biogenetic substancesthat

attempt to resolve the problem of infertility entail some impact on relationship,care and nurturing. A prevalent trend of

such kind of relationships which arebased originally on purchase of fertility service generates not just ethical issues,legal, social, psychological issues on the part of children as well as parents.

6

III.

Changing patterns of family formation

a.

Factors affecting patterns offamily formation

Diversity of family forms in contemporary societiesis

closely related to economiclevel of the family, changes of gender roles in family, state policies as well as theincreasing mobility of people.

In traditional rural societies, childlessness wasrare

to ensure the economicmanpower in production. Each memberwas

restricted by the sex role of thetraditional family, the father as the breadwinner and the mother as thehome-marker. With rapid socio-economic development, the mother is becomingthe supplementary provider to the family while still retainsher

in the Central and EasternEurope (CEE). However, since 1990s, CEE became a region with the lowest fertilityrates. Similar to developed countries, the postponed children may not be born7

and permanent childlessness is expected to grow in CEE. For example, there is atrend in the family formation among youngsters of Hungary that their transitionsto parenthood currently take place at a later stage in life course and growing ageat first birth than it did a few decades ago. Employment insecurity andunemployment further influence family formation of these young adults.

Experience singleness in Malaysia, Italy and Britain(R. Ibrahim,

NationalUniversity of Malaysia,

Malaysia; S. Rapisarda,University of Leed,UnitedKingdom)

The marriage practice of peoplehaschanged drastically over the past decades.The major change is the increasing average age of marriage.

In most of thedeveloping and developed countries, women are marrying at later age and someeven remain single throughout their childbearing years due to their participationin higher education and later into the job market. Singlehood

is a dynamicprocess in which women learn and relearn how to become women without beingwives and mothers. They may fulfill the natural vocation as ‘women’ by adoptingchildren.

In the case of Malaysian Malay Muslims, the total percentage ofnever-married women over the age of 30 increased from 3.1% in 1960 to 23.3%in 2000.

They have to bear heavy societal pressure of being unmarried.

Bycontrast, singlehood

is increasingly accepted in European countries such asBritain and Italy. The sense of commitment is weakening and the affirmation ofthe individual identity is rising in these countries. Besides, social networks otherthan the family become the key element in the lives of single people to deal withan uncertain future.

Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) couples in United Kingdom and Belgium(P.Nordqvist,University of Manchester,United Kingdom; C. Herbrand,UniversiteLibre de Bruxelles,Belgium)

The rising number of lesbian, gay and bisexual couples in some Europeancountries signifies the change ofprevalentmeaning of family that involves

bloodor marital relationship. The couples have their own children through eitheradoption or reproductive technologies of conception such as surrogacy. Moreover,the parenting practice is no longer the same as the traditional one. There is thenew family design of “co-parenthood” among gays and lesbians in order tomaintain family-work balance, familial flexibility, joint custody and parentalfunctions. The co-parenthood is a parentalarrangement between a man and awoman, who are not a couple. More concerns are recently given to whetherco-parenthood can apply beyond gays and lesbians. Moreover, the LGB elders8

often worry about their end of life care and thus social networks graduallyreplace the traditional kinship relationship.

Patterns of partnering of transnational families in North Europe and indeveloping countries(K. Caarls,

Maastricht,

the Netherlands;Thao

Thi Vu,

University of Copenhagen,

Denmark)

Globalization leads to highlevel oftransnational mobility. Most migrants ofdeveloped countries tend to marry someone fromthe hostcountry. Marriagebecomes the last route of migration to ensure upward economic mobility.According to the research study intheNetherlands, migration was related to anincrease in separation and divorce. The partnering relationship of transnationalmarriages was affected by the conflicting gender expectations between men andwomen. In these families, the men often seek a traditional wife while the womenhope foramore modern husband. Besides, there is animportant trend inmigration flowsthat thereis the growing numbers of independent femalemigrantsof

developing countries such as Vietnam.This development has allowedmany women to obtaineconomicindependence

and take

up

new social positionsin families and local communities.

In this connection, there are great challengesfor

theleft

behind families in terms of shifting gender boundaries and familycare.

c.

Challenges to theSociety–

AnExample in Scotland

With reference to the situation in Scotland, it would be hard to talk

about

“typicalfamily”

by 2020. In Scotland, people often marry later or cohabit withoutmarriage. An increasing number of children are born outside marriage.

Theseparation and divorce rates also increase dramatically in recent decades.

Among them, the divorce rate is 33% higher for families with children of disability.Household with one adult with children rise from 150,000 in 2004 to 200,000 in2024. About 25% of parents are lone parents who require more flexible job toearn a living while retaining their responsibility in childrearing. In Scotland, 30%of all mothers will spend some time in stepfamily before the age of 45. Asestimated by the government, step-families are the dominant family form inScotland in 2010 (Parenting Across Scotland, 2010). Changes in maritalrelationship and quality of parents’ relationship affect how the children adapt tochanging family situations. Not onlydowhat parents do to the child matter, butalsohow the parents behave with each other. Parenting and partnershiparethushigher upinthe Government’s

agenda.

9

In response to economic crisis in recent years, the policy of United Kingdom aimsto re-establish the financial capability of individuals through flexible job, childcare subsidy and tax concession. In Scotland, women and lone parents aresupported totake up orsustain employment or to attain college study for abetter future. The local government provides flexible child care to encourageself-reliance of concerned groups who are suffering from obesity, mental illnessand alcoholic addiction. Therefore, they would no longer depend on socialwelfare only.

d.

Family changes in Hong Kong society

Similar to other countries, Hong Kong society also experiences significant changesin family formation. Similar pattern of changes is found. According to the reportof Census

and Statistics Department in July 2010, the proportion of thepopulation aged 65 and over is projected to rise markedly, from 13% in 2009 to28% in 2039. Thesex ratio

(i.e. the number of males per 1,000 females) of thepopulation is projected to fall noticeably, from 889 in 2009 to 744 in2039.

Besides the changes in population, recent trends of late marriage andpostponement of childbearing also indicate the rising number of singleton peopleand one-child family.

In addition, the family composition becomes diverse as aresult of rising number of new immigrants from Mainland and increasingethnicity of Hong Kong society. Families with disabled members or prisoners havemore complicated interactions in partnering and parenting decisions. Last but notleast, the recent court case about whether a transsexual woman will be allowedto marry her boyfriend drew much societal attention. There is still lack of localconsensus and agreed cultural basis to redefine "man" and "woman".

With globalization, there arechanging patterns of family formations in differentcontemporary societies. The changes bring forth the discussion on personalrelationship, family functions such as reproduction and parenting as well as socialsupport networks that are different from thetraditional ones. Social workpractitioners have to be aware of own values and to modify practice responsivelyto fit for ever changing family situations.

10

IV.

Migration andTransnationalFamilies

Transnational family can be said to be one of the most outstanding themein theconference. Many presentations were related to the issues concerningtransnational families. What defines transnational

familyis not

so muchthe act ofcross border movement

of the family, but the dispersion of the family

acrossinternational borders

where different family members stay temporarily

in one or theother countryfor

different

reasons--

political

reasons, economic reasons andeducational pursuit, etc. In the meantime, globalization also leads to new patternsof

transnational mobility and migration. With the

advancement ofcommunication/information

technology and transportation technology, it alsocontributes to the emergence of transnationalfamilies. The

emergence oftransnational families as a result of migration for work abroad / labor migration andthe challenges experienced by these transnational families was quite a commontheme.

the loss experienced by family members who stay behind /are“left behind”;



how migration affects family life in terms of reproductive practice/child bearing,

parenting,

and the distancingamong those who maintain transnationalrelations;



future orientation among those who form new families in the post migrationscenario;



the practice of caring and support in transnational family solidarity across threegenerations—interplay of stages of the family life, gender, generation, socialcategories, life circumstances and historical context.

of familymembers and through dislocation. These families have to adapt to the newculture and societal circumstances and norms different from their own countryof

origin. They have to struggle between dealing with familyseparation

and at the11

same time maintaining family ties, strugglingin the

involvement

in family matterssuch as the children’s education and well-being, but somehowthis isdifficultbecause of geographic distance, limited resources and

other limitations.Thereis

paper

presented in the conference

exploring

mothers’

and children’s views andpractice of constructing identities and belongings, andtherole

that

ethnicity,class and language play in these practices. There is also research

paper trying tofind the ways transnational families,

with members having migrated to Europeancountries especially to Spain, Italy, U.K.and

Ireland from Romanian villages,

manage to function when almost all active members of the families are abroad,leaving only caregivers, children and oldpeople and the sick remaining athome.While living spatially apart, it also challenges the maintenance of intimaterelationship amongcouples and parent-child of the transnational families.

b.

Global Care Chain

European Commission 2007 defines“circular migration”

as “a

form of migrationthat is managed in a way allowing some degree of legal mobility back and forthbetween two countries”.

Global care chain was first used by Arlie Hochschild todescribe a series of personal link between people across the globe basing on paidor unpaid work of caring

(Hochschild, 2003). In the Conference, suchphenomenon of global care chain was identifiedin some of the research paperson transnational families. Thelabor

migrants move from the poor to affluentcountries to care for the young, the old and the sick while leaving those young,old and the sick to whom they normally provide care for to be cared by otherpaid orunpaid

worker, or usually not being cared for at all. There is the trend forinternational trade of domestic workers. In the process, female is often centralto global care chain, with female supplying carelabor

while consuming otherwomen’s carelabor. Lower down the chain, it may be even an older daughterwho substitutes for her mother in providing unpaid care for her younger siblings.

c.

Shifting ofGenderBoundaries

Another theme concerning challenges of transnational families discussed a lot inthe conference covers the family membersstaying

behind. While there isa

trend of feminization of migration, it is often the femalelabors

working

in othercountries aslabor

migrants.

As a result, it is the husbands and the childrenwho stay behind and some researchers even term it as families being“leftbehind”. While the wives own the breadwinner’s role by working aslabor

migrants abroad, it’s thehusbands who do

thedomestic work intheir

countriesof origin. Then when the wives earn more, with betterknowledge

and exposure,12

theirvoice

infamily

decision

making becomesstronger.

The masculinity of menwho stay behind to beresponsible for the domestic and child care work ischallenged. This seemingly andsubtly

pushes

theoriginal gender boundaries.The traditionalgender

boundaries between public and domestic sphere thenhave

to berenegotiated

in the

transnational families in view of the feminizationof migration.

d.

TransnationalMobility of the“Invisible”

Grandparents

While much coverage on transnational families are on the challenge oflabor

migration

families as presented in the Conference, it is worth noting that there

was

discussion on the transnational mobility of the grandparents from China whomove to provide care works to their migrated children in terms of post-natal care,child care and housework, etc. However, when they are suffering from majorillness, they will choose not to burden their children’s finance by returning totheir homeland. While facing challenges in dailyliving

in terms ofunfamiliarlanguage, social network,

etc., these grandparents were found experiencing 3“NOTs”

in their relationship withtheir

childrenand

grandchildren, namely:



Not a master as they can’t make decisions for the families;



Not a guest as they have to do housework and child care;



Not a

servant as they are not paid for those domestic and child care work.

Duringdecadebefore

the return of sovereignty of Hong Kong from Britain to China in1997, a

lot of the families experienced migration and became transnational families.The decision making process of migration, the staying behind in China and the issueof“astronaut

families”

all challenged quite a lot of Hong Kong families at that time.In the past two decades, there

has beena

trend ofcross-border marriages with HKmen getting married with women in Mainland China. There are also a lot offamilies with family members, often the husbands, working in China for a few days aweek and then back to Hong Kong in weekend. To what extent they are experiencingsimilar challenges of the transnational families as reflected in the Conference isworth exploring.

Besides, as far as migration is mentioned, people

oftenrefer

to cross countrymigration

or

migration

of

a long term or even permanent one.Yet, in fact, in Asiancountries

such as Vietnam, quite many

peopleare labor migration from one provinceto another

which

is

in fact with quite different culture though within the samecountry.We have to expand our conceptualization of migrationand

its challengesbrought forth.The following areasbeingtouchedin the Conferenceare much

work to domestic workers fromSouth or SE Asia such as the Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand, a lot of families inHong Kong are also on the nodes in the global care chain and there seemingly isa

commoditization

of care. How do we social workers view those domestic workers atthe lower node down the global care chain but are contributing domestic care workto many families in Hong Kong? What is the implication behind the notion of globalcare chain are to Hong Kong families?

All these are worthy of

further exploration.

14

V.

Parenting in a Changing World

Socialization through parenting

is

one of the core functions of family. Sincefamiliesare under on-goingchangesin the world, changes

in parenting in the modern world

seems unavoidable.Numbers of researches presented in this conferencewitnessedchanging patterns of family formationbecause of the

InAustralia,frequent grand-childcare is more prevalent than any of the Europeannations.

The gendered meanings and practices of grand-childcare evident ininterviews show grandmothers are often positioned as nurturing, coordinators ofcare and struggling to balance care and time while grandfathers are mostdescribed as male role models to grandchildren and can opt in and out caringlabour (Briony Horsfall, Swinburne, university of Technology, Australia).

A research in Germanyhasfound out that relationships between adult childrenand their parents are defined and reconstructed across the transition togrand-parenthood. The transition towards the parental status is widely perceivedas fundamentally ambivalent in terms of intergenerational relations within thefamily. (Katharine Ulbrich, Dresden Leibniz Graduate School, Germany). Withdiversifyingforms offamilies, increased life expectancy, growing numbers ofdual-worker households and high rates of family breakdown, grandparents arenow playingmore

prominent

role in their grandchildren’s lives.

Results of a research of adolescent-grandparent relationships supported theposition that grandparents are a significant factor in the lives of adolescents. Theinteractions consistently emphasized the role of parents as gatekeepers ofintergenerational exchanges (Jo-Pei Tan, University of Putra Malaysia, Malaysia).

b.

Parenting in the Internet Age

Furthermore,challengesfaced by parents in the internet age are real.

As newtechnology and different types of media have increasing presence the family15

household,

the current view of children’s leisure activities is of isolated sedentaryactivities rather than active social play and a concern about safety in theirneighborhoods (Erika Doyle, University of Dublin, Ireland).

In an age where public and parental concern constrains young peoples’ use ofpublic spaces, the teenage bedroom is a new site for the development of self andidentity and a new focus for the negotiation of boundaries of privacy. The rise ofthe Internet, and the active engagement of young people in networked spaces,add a new and complex layers to this dynamic (Zachari Duncalf, StrathclydeUniversity, United

Kingdom).

The last thirty years has seen a boom in communications technology, anincrease in geographical mobility, and an increase in the number working andlone parents,

to name just a few transformations. One result of these changeshas been an increasingly individualized society, which has led to changes in thefamily unit. The emergence of technology has dramatically altered play,supervision, and communication.(Leanne

Franklin, Loughborough University,United Kingdom).

c.

Parenting as Socialization

However, no matter how late people takes part in parenting,socialization is still acore objective that parents should reach among various family functions.

It isnot easy for parents nowadays to shape their children as in previous decades. Inlocal situation, some frontline social workers observe that parents are evenimpacted by their children in a negative manner and both their parental goalsand expectation are changed. To examine this phenomenon, parents’ subjectivefeelings and thought should be taken into account.The following study, named“From Good Babies to Bad Mothers” conducted by ananthropologist,Dr. KellyDavis of the University of Edinburgh,

does bring us insight.

The Research studied theKinship and expert advice in the process of learning tobe mother. There were 33 interviewees (mother-daughter pairs in Scotland, bothmothers) who were white, British, mainly middle-class, relatively well-educatedand non-religious from the three cohorts, 1945-1960; 1961-1980; 1990-2004.Besides, the scholar reviewed professionally published childrearing literature inthese cohorts.

‘Habittraining’ and ‘Socializingdiscipline’ are focuses of this study. Habit16

The research told us that expectations of mothers and the intensity of motheringhad

changed from 1945-2004. Changing experts’ discourses about the form andgoal of children’s socialization were also found. Women’s notions did mirrorprofessional opinions.

The first cohort, 1945-1960, was named as adult-like management.In this periodwhich was full with post-war anxiety, published childrearing advice wereinflexible. Interviewees expected even very youngbabies to follow routine, i.e.mother set the structure of daily living. ‘Successful’ training meant the child fitinto social conventions of adult world. This value led to proper socializing ofolder child, where ‘spoiling’ was avoided by instilling obedience. None of theinterviewees spoke of being a ‘bad’ mother. ‘Good’ baby was equal tonon-demanding, placid, content, who did not cry often.

In thesecondcohort, controlled flexibility (1961-1980),

increasing flexibility inchildrearing might be viewed as an extension of changing moral values. Controlstill important, but experts paid increasing attention to a child’s individualcharacter. ‘Timing’ and ‘readiness’ were key concepts as developmentalpediatrics and psychology gained recognition and influence. Some intervieweesspoke of strictness; others felt they were less rigid than previous generations.While there were still references to ‘good’ babies, anxiety over being a ‘bad’mother was also expressed. In socializing discipline, expert literature stressedchildren’s emotional and psychological stability. ‘Love’ became reinforcementfor the mother-child relationship, so that cooperation based on affection

was

important. For the women, the notion of the individuality of each childinfluenced their socializing discipline practices. Many mothers remembered thelack of personal recognition in their own upbringing.

From 1992 onwards, i.e. the third cohort named ‘happy individual’ (1990-2004),increasing multiplicity in family forms and ideologies. Given these changes,professional literature concentrated on the quality rather than the form of theparent-child relationship. A multitude of approaches, flexibility and ‘shoppingaround’ related to the personality of each child. The multiplicity of approaches17

talked about and tried by interviewees indicates the extent of choice. Optimumroutine one that suited both mother and child with least amount of stress.Women’s references to ‘feeling like a bad mother’ often stemmed from thedissonance betweenthe approaches a mother wanted to take and which methodthey had to employ. Narratives on socializing discipline focused on a fluid,interactive and reflective process. Compared to older cohorts, the children hadmuch more influence in the disciplining process. Mutual satisfaction in themother-child relationship meant ‘success’ in the socialization. More referencesto letting children ‘have a say’ or ‘spreading their wings’. Meant to build upchild’s self-esteem, ensuring they are ‘kind’, ‘generous’ ‘open-minded’.

A

shift in the moral undertone of childrearing, from the mother preventing herchild from being ‘demanding’ in the 1945-1960 period to the mother doing herutmost to preserve her child’s ego and the quality of the mother-childrelationshipby the period 1990-2004. As the intensification of a mother’s duty insocializing her children increased, many women sought outside advice, whichwas steadily multiplying and was often conflicting. These factors togethermanifested in more women’s narratives revealing feelings of ‘flawed’ mothering.This concurrence of the intensification of a mother’s socializing/childrearing andthe proliferation of possible methods locates any long-term difficulties orproblems as a failure on the mother’s part to employ the proper practices. Thus,there was a greater burden of interpretation on the mother to know her childand act accordingly. This burden of interpretations expected when a child was stillvery young, for it was the means by which a mother secures a harmoniousrelationship with her child.

Be aware of global in the local, we find during the past six decades, mothers werechanged from demanding their children to demanding themselves. Although moreand more professional advice was offered, they thought some of them wereconflicting. Children in fact have more influence in the disciplining process. Inresponse to this change, local practitioners unavoidably have to review their goal ofparenting education. The traditional perspective, named parent-effect perspective, isno longer suitable to nowadays complicated parent-child relationship. Parents maynot be the only shaper to their children. It is high time for the sector to think aboutthe necessity of having a paradigm shift or inducing new perspective in parentingeducation in order to address challenges faced by the parents.Everyone thinks thatparents influence their children, but few people ask the ways in which children affect18

their parents. The love, satisfaction, and fulfillment children offer can changeparents’lives. So can the stress and worry that brought by the unsatisfactoryparent-child relationship . And, it may be a neglected issues of family dynamics, inglobal and in local.

19

VI.

Family Research, Policy and Practice–

A

British Experience

While the above mentions more about some major trend of family issues andpractices that we observedduring

the conference and visitation, we were also verymuch impressed by the momentum of evidence-based practice in UK and manycountries in Europe. Research projects carried out are deliberately linked withpractices and policies, and thescale of projects isvery big.

We have seen more andmore longitudinal studies being carried by these countries to trace changes offamilies and the family members at different life stages.

a.

The “About Families” Project

In recent years, there has been a very considerable increase in interest byresearchers, practitioners and policy-makers in “knowledge transfer” within thewelfare sector

in Hong Kong. Similar discussion was found commonly in UnitedKingdom. During the study visit, the delegation had visited the Parenting acrossScotland, and got to know one ofa

project

entitled

“About Families.”

Theproject is

aimed

at providing relevant and accessible evidence to inform servicedevelopment for the families affected by disability.

“About Families” project, funded by the National Lottery through Big LotteryFund, is a three-year project which started in March 2010. The project leverages

joint efforts of various partners, including Centre for Research on Families andRelationship (research institute), Parenting across Scotlandand CapabilityScotland (NGOs).

The rationale and guiding principles of “About Families” projectare as below:

Gathering evidence

“About Families” project links existing research with the experiences of parents,practitioners and disabled people to identify and explore key challenges facingparenting and disability services and the families they work with.

Sharing information

Information and evidence are presented in user-friendly topic reports which helpservices to identify clear routes to developing service provision.

Informing action

Voluntary and public sector agencies use our topic reports to assess what action20

needs to be taken based on the evidence presented. “About Families” works withkey agencies to develop, implement and evaluate action plans

based on theneeds they identify.

Evidence to action

Over three years, the “About Families” partners are gathering feedback fromservices and service users to better understand which aspects of parenting are ofmost concern to families. Using this feedback, five key parenting and disabilitytopics will be identified for investigation.

To further illustrate the project implementation, the “Evidence to Action Cycle” isdepicted as below:

As one of the key topics for investigation, “Parenting Teenagers”

was identifiedbased on the hotline service statistics of the “Parentline”. The action plan wasbeing developed with key stakeholders based on issues arising

from theParenting Teenagers: relationships and behaviour issues. The major findingscould be referred to the topic briefing inAppendix

2.

b.

Implication and Reflection

From the British experience in the linkage amongfamily research, policy andpractice, some implications and reflections are observed for the development oflocal knowledge transfer inthe sector.

Knowledge transfer is not linear

21

Much of the research on knowledge transfer points out that while policy-makersassume that knowledge transfer works by giving the knowledge to the group thatneeds it, this is not the best approach. Knowledge transfer works better throughprocesses that encourage discussion, problem solving and joint developmentamong researchers, practitioners and policy-makers. Thus, knowledge transfershould not be a linear process.

Different agenda among different stakeholders

Practitioners and researchers might have fundamentally differentinterests, whichmay overlap or coincide at times. Researchers may be interested in seekingknowledge in accordance with the rules of scientific enquiry, while thepractitioners may be concerned more about the knowledge that has practical use.Such discrepancy in expectation should be addressed in order to facilitateeffective knowledge transfer.

Research comes after policy

The logic of the evidence-based policy approach suggests that researchers shouldadvise policy-makers about a particular problem on the basis of the evidence, aprogramme is then designed to address it and is subsequently implemented.However, the reality is usually that programmes or policy initiatives are designedbypolicy-makers on the basis of what they want done, and may only involveresearchers in the implementation phase.

Practitioner’s role in knowledge transfer

As a matter of fact, evidence-based policy and practice do not quite recognizepractitioners’ role in knowledge transfer. Indeed practical experience, craftknowledge and professional judgement may be even interpreted as barriers totransfer. Practitioners seem to be recipients of research, rather than interpretersor producers of actionable knowledge. To ensure effective knowledge transfer,practitioners should be engaged to take up more proactive role in the wholeprocess.

22

VII.

Concluding Remarks

If the family forms and practicesmentioned aboveare not new, we perhaps can saythat these prevailing forms and practices can be looked at in new ways. We wouldlike to conclude by pointing out some of such findings from the conference andvisitation.

a.

While some practices did exist in the past, those practices are now much moreprevalent in our era. A new normalization is found that different forms orpractices of families are increasing being seen as normal, and that they areincreasingly quicker to be accepted as normal.

b.

As the family changes, the ways people perceive it also changes. Somedimensions of looking at the family, eg. family composition and structure, maynot be as important as before. As forms and practices of the family getproliferated, the intrinsic qualities ofthe family

are seen as more important thanthe outlook. So,for example,for many in the West, step-parents are no longerseen as less desirable. What’s more important is how the step parents relatewith their children.

Likewise,

parental separation is not in itself causative ofnegative outcomes for children and young people. Rather it is the interactionbetween risk and protectivevariables

which play the key role in shaping thewellbeing of children.

c.

Because of what is said above, the family

is

now under a new regime ofmanagement. Management of risk becomes a primary

objective in maintainingfamilies, not just for those traditionally disadvantaged forms but also for thosetypical forms.

d.

As information is more accessible to lay persons, advices from helpingprofessionals are both resisted and needed. They are resisted because they areno longer the knowledge authority as information gets proliferated andeverybodyhas

access to those professional wisdoms.

Web-based relationshipor personal support helpdeskis moreaccessible to people (e.g.www.familieschange.ca

). Advices are resisted

also because there arecompeting discourses about the same concern or issue. People get indifferentabout these advices. Yet,they are needed because risks are all over the placesand

everybody is looking foreffectiveways to manage their families.Helpingprofessionals do relieve their anxiety in this risky society.

e.

The family is used to be theprivate sphere, governed by a set of discourses ofpersonal and interpersonal relationships, of familial hierarchy and norms. In23

this era, however, the family gets more and more“publicized.”

Private practicesin the households required more and more public regulatory measures. Familialrelationships demand values, norms or even regulations which are previouslyapplicable in the public sphere. Infamilies, we now speak of children’sparticipation not just in their own development, but also in parental maritalrelationship. Children demand more participation, and more transparency,

which

is theprerequisite

for their participation.

f.

In addition to being“publicized”, families and relationships are getting more andmore marketized /commodified. Commodification of care isprevalent

in manyparts of the world. Commodification of relationship is also common.Relationship goes beyond natural familial bonds or social mating, butisincreasinglyon sale and purchase.One can pay to get a baby,

or

to get amother to give birth to a baby,

or

to pay a father for his sperm. One can alsopay to design his/her own family orset ofrelationships. All these commodifiedoptions are now more and more available and acceptable.

g.

Asthefamily

gets

more and morepublicized

and commodified, the biological andcultural gives way to the social, economic and politicalin theorganization of thefamilies and relationships. For children born socially and economically moreadvantageous but biological less well, their social and economical advantages cancompensate for their biological disadvantage. Children born socially andeconomically disadvantageous have no toadequate

post-natal care even thoughthey are born biologically well.

h.

All these point to the increasing importance of public policies which are aimed atregulating the social, economical and political domains of our lives. Leaving thefamilies on their own seems less and less an option for any advanced societieswho claim to care about families.

i

Appendix 1: Visitation Schedule

21 June

Visits in Edinburgh

10:00–

11:30

Sue Robertson

Director

One Parent Families Scotland,

13 Gayfield Square,

Edinburgh EH1 3NX

0131-557-7891

email:suerobertson@opfs.org.uk

3:00pm

Alison Clancy

Project Officer

Parenting Across Scotland

1 Boroughloch Square

Edinburgh

EH8 9NJ

Tele: 0131 319 8071

email:alison.clancy@children1st.org.uk

22 June

Visits in London

10:30am

Jill Kirby

Director

Centre for Policy Studies

57 Tufton Street

London SW1P 3QL

+44 (0)207 222 4488

07879 647 784

Email:jill@cps.org.uk

2:30pm

Clem Henricson

Director of Research

Family and Parenting Institute

430 Highgate Studios

53-79 Highgate Road

London

NW5 1TL

0207 424 3460

Email:Henricson@familyandparenting.org

ii

Appendix 2:Findings Brief of the Project of“About Families”

iii

Appendix 3:Report on Individual Organization Visit

******

1.

Date of Visit/Meeting:

21 June2010

2.

Name of Agency: One Parent Families Scotland

3.

Address/Meeting Venue: 13 Gayfield Square, Edinburgh EH1 3NX

4.

Contact Person:

Sue Robertson, Director

5.

Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served,programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities:

One Parent Families Scotland (OPFS), established in 1944, works to ensure thatall families, particularly those headed by a lone parent, have the support,information and confidence needed to play a full part in Scotland's economicand social life. OPFS encourage and enable lone parents to believe inthemselves, enter education, training or employment and take up newopportunities. OPFS believes that lone parents as a group are unique in havingsole responsibility for the combined roles of breadwinner and main carer. Shethus delivers vital childcare services that allowing parents to work, learn, andtake part in training.

Each year, OPFS influences the lives of over 5,000 families and 12,000 childrenthrough provision of information, vital tailor-made childcare services as well astraining and employment opportunities from nine projects such as the 101Project Dundee. Three levels of service including national, local and childcareservices areprovided. She remains the biggest athome childcare provider

inScotland reaching out to 2,300 families each year and thus enabling 1,500parents to find new confidence and entertraining, education or employment.The Marks & Start return to work programme

offers lone parents in Edinburghthe pre-employment training and work placement in conjunction with Marksand Spencer. Moreover,information and advice

are given to 3,000 familiesthrough itsLone Parent Helpline and publication. At policy level, OPFSresponds togovernment consultations

to influence and shape the policies

thatwill improve the lives of one parent families. OPFS alsoconduct research

onareas which are relevant to one parent families and which have the potential toinfluence public policyand increase understanding of the crucial issues facinglone parents and their children. OPFS works closely with other partners such asGingerbread and Parenting Across Scotland.

iv

In regard to the national services, OPFS receives grants from the ScottishGovernment towards the core costs of Helpline, information and employabilityservices. These have been supplemented with other grants from private sectorfunding and National Lottery. In regard to local services, OPFS also receives localauthority grants such as from the city of Edinburgh. She also receives donationsand help in kind from a number of individuals.

6.

Content of Meeting:

i.

Briefing of service provision of OPFS: the types of national and local serviceswere introduced with highlights ontailor-made services rendering to loneparents who choose to stay at home and look after their children during theirvital early years or during the family crisis, as well as services for young parent inEdinburgh. Annual Review 2009 and publications weregiven.

ii.

Rationale behind the services of OPFS: service provision was closely related toNational Policy that lone parents are encouraged to enter the mainstream ofeconomic and social activity through either part-time or full-time employment.Parents are matched depending on their decisions to be either the part-timeassistants in crèches or full time employees. Their financial capability isenhanced through flexible job opportunities, home based childcare services,flexible crèches, tailor-made services for children with additional needs.

iii.

Challenges facing by OPFS: the rate of lone parents increase to 25% in Scotland.They face complex and interrelated challenges. Firstly, they are the only onepotential "breadwinner" and one carer to share the load of familyresponsibilities. Secondly, the majority of lone parents are women, averaging 36years of age, face with inequality and disadvantages many women face in theworkplace. They are vulnerable to poverty triggered by certain life events ortransitions such as separation, divorce, pregnancy, ill health, homelessnessand into/out of employment. Moreover, being financially supported by ScottishGovernment, changed government policy and the budget cut are also thechallenges faced by OPFS.

7.

Observation:

(e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong)

OPFS is one of the main service agency rendering services to lone parents atboth national and local levels. It seems that the website and Helpline are widelyused by the potential families for advice and service matching. It also provides anation-wide platform for lone parents to unite together for joint effort at policyv

advocacy. Specialized service for families of single parents, prisoners,substance abuse in Hong Kong may make reference from OPFS in servicedesigns and delivery modes. Moreover, the idea of flexible job and corporatecollaborations are good to meet the particular needs of parents. It may beapplicable to Hong Kong as well. For example, the ‘return to work’ programmeoffers a time schedule of training and placement which fit within school hours.Thus, the parents are enabled to learn and work while retaining responsibility ofchildrearing. Besides, corporate social responsibility is emphasized in offeringwork opportunity, other than donations only, that are essential to support theneedy parents.

8.

Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?)

It is worthwhile for specialized service teams to visit the agency again. Nexttime, the team may visit other project centres and/or talk to service users tohave deeper understanding on the local service provision.

This agency is the operating name of the National Family and Parenting Institute(NFPI). It is an NGO being subvented by the Government and an independentcharity guided by a board of trustees working to champion families.

Theorganization draws on research and evidence to influence policy and it offerspractical solutions to make society more family friendly.

Its goal is to work for afamily friendly society which values families in all diversity, promotes conditionswhich enable families to

thrive. The organization aims:



to get to know families and to involve families in work;



to have evidence-based practice and work in collaboration with families andothers which work with families to result change;



to work to improve family life;



to find new ways of working to get good results.

vi

The organization has delivered a lot of programs through school and is similar tothe Family Life Education operating agencies in Hong Kong, but on the wholemore

conscious on putting their service with evidence-based research.

6.

Content of Meeting:

In the meeting, the delegates were received by two other staff of the agencyapart from Ms Clem Henricson, the director of research. They introduced to usthe goals and work of the Family and Parenting Institute. They also shared thekey working focus of the agency in the meeting. Upon our enquiries, they sharedtheir advocacy for family friendly policy. They advocate for paternal leave andflexible working time. Since April 2010, husband can share part of thematernityleave with his wife.

They also work for social care for the disabled children which results onextending direct payment of subsidy to the parents, expanding communitysupport to the disabled children and to increase respite care for the disabledchildren.

Besides, they work hard to support the separated and divorcedfamilies as well as drawing public attention to the impact of TV advertisement onshaping the children. In the meeting, discussion on family impact assessment wasalso held.

The agency has alot of publication on families and family-related themes. Inthe meeting, the books being published by the agency were displayed.

7.

Observation

This agency is similar to some Family Life Education operating agencies in HongKong. It is appreciated that the agency puts much effort on havingevidence-based practice and will conduct research to influence policy andadvocate for more family-friendly society. The agency has completed researchon "Family trends: British families since the 1950s”, “Family Well-being”, etc. ,and is currently with the following researches at hand:



“Knowing families”



“Parental engagement in early home learning”



“Relationship support”



“Learning from older couples and carers about care needs”

The rich publications of the agency are also of reference value to our social workvii

practice on promoting family and parenting work in Hong Kong.

8.

Recommendations:

(eg. Whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again)

This agency is worth visiting and is recommended to have further networking infuture.

******

1.

Date of Visit/Meeting: 21 June 2010

2.

Name of Agency: Parenting across Scotland

3.

Address/Meeting Venue:1 Boroughloch Square Edinburgh EH8 9NJ

4.

Contact Person:

Alison Clancy, ProjectOfficer

5.

Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served,

programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities:

Parenting across Scotland is a partnership of charities which offers support tochildren and families in

Scotland. The charities work together to focus onparenting issues and to help realize agency’s vision:

"A Scotland where all parents and families are valued and supported to givechildren the best possible start in life."

Parenting across Scotland supports parents and families through its informationservice and partners' help lines. The agency finds out what matters to parentsand families and what they need, and get this across to politicians. The agencyalso shares research, policy and good practice with people who work withfamilies. The agency’s partners are organizations that support thousands ofparents and families in Scotland. They are Aberlour Childcare Trust, CapabilityScotland, CHILDREN 1st, One Parent Families Scotland, Relationships Scotland,SMC, Scottish Adoption, and Stepfamily Scotland. Parenting across Scotland isfunded by the Scottish Government.

6.

Content of Meeting:



Introduction of the Parenting across Scotland



Sharing how families were changing in Scotland



Introduction of the Scottish Government National PerformanceFramework



Introduction of families in Scotland Government policies



Introduction of the workflow of policy work taken up by the agency

viii



Exchanging of Scotland and Hong Kong’s situation among delegates

7.

Observation:

(e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong)



The work focus of the Parenting across Scotland was clear.



The agency was endeavored to conduct evidence-based practice familyresearch.



By identifying NGOs which shared common value and concern, theagency built up strategic alliance in order to achieve her vision.

8.

Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?)

Parenting across Scotland is surely worthwhile to visit again, especially to see indetail how they conductfamily research and how they apply findings intopractice.

******

1.

Date of Visit/Meeting:22 June 2010

2.

Name of Agency:Centre for Policy Studies

3.

Address/Meeting Venue:57 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL

4.

Contact Person:

ProfJill Kirby,Director

5.

Description of Agency, including type of services provided, target served,programmes, staffing, funding sources, and special facilities:

The Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) is a think tank established since MargaretThatcher’s government. Its

aimisto develop and promote policies that providefreedom and encouragement for individuals to pursue the aspirations they havefor themselves and their families, within the security and obligations of a stableand law-abiding nation.

6.

Content ofMeeting:

Major agenda covered in the visitation are listed as below:



Latest situation of the development of think tank in UK



New direction for family policy adopted by the new Conservativegovernment



Strategies in making influence for policy formulation,e.g. conductingevidence-based policy study and lobbying politicians



Specific issues-

such as the impact of family breakdown in UK

ix

7.

Observation: (e.g. stimulation / implications for Hong Kong)

The experience of CPS is not only a research institute,

but also to provide aplatform to link up the NGOs and politician, say through seminar. The idea of“putting the right people together” is inspiring for the reflection on thedevelopment of think tank in Hong Kong, or in wider extent the effective modelof policy advocacy.

8.

Recommendations: (e.g. whether it is worthwhile to visit the agency again?)

It is worthwhile to visit other similar agencies in the future, since it does notonly provide insights for conducting policy studies, but also to demonstrate howto apply the evidence generated for the purpose of policy advocacy. Eventhough the political environment is different between Hong Kong and othercountries, it can provide stimulation for our own reflection.